No decade matches 70 s for diversity and richness of play a top
Baseline flat strokes like Connors,Rosewall,Gerulaitis,Kodes
Artists like Rosewall,Nasty,Santana,Orantes,Panatta and we can fit in here Mayer and Amriteaj
All round genious like Laver,Nastase,Mc Enroe and other secondary guys like Ramirez or Gerulaitis as well as Okker and Lutz
Top spin machines such as Borg,Vilas and other guys like Dibbs,Solomon,Hugueras and Barazutti
High quality serve and volley with Smith,Ashe,Roche,Newcombe
Tanner,Gottfried,Stockton,Pecci, Panatta
And a great supporting cast with Fibak,Cox,Alexander,Dent,Franuliovic,Pilic,Taylor, Lloyd,Kriek,Clerc,Gildem.,
Gimeno,Richey,Riessen,Gorman,Metrevali,Gisbert,Fle ming,Teacher,Scanlo,Edmondson and Bertolucci, and I am leaving aside some names
No other decade was richer except maybe the 50' s and even that with less depth
,

Kiki?! This is an outstanding list!!
You have listed 55 players, could you put them in order for a definitive list of The Top 50 Men of the 70's? I bet this would start a lot of discussion......

http://tennis-buzz.com/1971-us-open-...s-the-it-girl/“She turned head because she was a pretty, young thing, but she captivated everyone because of her gutsy play and icy determination.
Chris Evert was not the first teen prodigy, but in an era filled with veterans like Billie Jean King and Margaret Court, along with one-handed backhands, serve and volley tactics, and uncertainty about the viability of the women’s tour, Evert revolutionized the women’s game.

On September 4, 1971, in her first Open at Forest Hills, this 16 years old perky blonde with a 12 tournaments, 44 match winning streak landed on the stadium court for her second round match against fourth seed Mary Ann Eisel.
Her wins had largely been against lesser lights or on clay, which favored her relentless baseline game. But on grass against one of the surface’s top players, she was unable to simply grind down her opponent. And so, Evert, an amateur who had taken 2 weeks off from high school in Fort Lauderdale for this tournament, seemed headed for home.

She lost a close first set 6-4 and trailed 6-5 in the second when Eisel stockpiled 3 match points. As television announcers Bud Collins and Jack Kramer gave her a warm ‘nice try kid’ sendoff, Evert suddenly showed Forest Hills and a national television audience that she had the makings of a champion.
On Eisel’s first effort, Evert set the tone, whistling a big backhand service return down the line. Then on a second serve, Evert mashed a crosscourt forehand passing shot. Evert easily captured the tiebreaker then crushed her demoralized foe 6-1 in the third set.

King who’d come over to watch the rookie, was impressed by how she handled the pressure, saying later:

A few remarks. I could imagine Rosewall ahead of Connors for that period, but I can live with Ken's fourth place.

But I would rank Tony Roche much higher than you did.Also Okker. Edmondson is much too high in your list. And Riessen is much too low ranked. Remember that Riessen often gave heavy problems to Laver (their hth is about even).

A few remarks. I could imagine Rosewall ahead of Connors for that period, but I can live with Ken's fourth place.

But I would rank Tony Roche much higher than you did.Also Okker. Edmondson is much too high in your list. And Riessen is much too low ranked. Remember that Riessen often gave heavy problems to Laver (their hth is about even).

No way Rosewall is ahead Connors for 68-79 and he and Newcombe are extremely close with John winning the big duels
Rosewall, after second thought is 5 and Newcombe is 4

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet

[quote=kiki;7035770]No way Rosewall is ahead Connors for 68-79 and he and Newcombe are extremely close with John winning the big duels
Rosewall, after second thought is 5 and Newcombe is 4[/QUOTE

kiki, You are right that Connors deserves a place ahead of Rosewall.

I guess you have not realized the following: Rosewall:Newcombe is 14:9, in big events (GS and WCT) he leads 4:3. Rosewall reached a GS SF 13 times and Newcombe "only" 10 times. So I think Rosewall ahead of Newcombe was yet a good decision.

Bobby one, I ranked off my hat because I did not contrast to full strertch the recirds, best ATP positions or H2H
So you could be right as far as Roche,Eddo,Okker and Riessen are concerned
It is so close over 11 yrs slot of time that there is
room for discussion, of course
But Roche and Okker where top players although were unable to win a
major title including Masters or WCT so bear that in mind
As for Rosewall it is very close with Newcombe and your point fits well but Newcombe won their most famous martches and that is a slighr edge

Bobby one, I ranked off my hat because I did not contrast to full strertch the recirds, best ATP positions or H2H
So you could be right as far as Roche,Eddo,Okker and Riessen are concerned
It is so close over 11 yrs slot of time that there is
room for discussion, of course
But Roche and Okker where top players although were unable to win a
major title including Masters or WCT so bear that in mind
As for Rosewall it is very close with Newcombe and your point fits well but Newcombe won their most famous martches and that is a slighr edge

kiki, You are right that ranking 50 players is very difficult. You have done a great job, however.

Roche did not win an open major but the reason might be that in several finals he met Laver and Rosewall respectively who were awesome at that time.

quite a list, kiki, thanks for posting it and making a case for doubles in this forum
i have no definite list, but i would vote for Gerulaitis/Sandy Mayer and Davidson/Newcombe. G/M won Wimbledon, D/N won the U.S.
don´t see Edmondson/Marks. Eddos GrandSlam success came in the 80´s and not with Marks
don´t see Ashe/Tanner either. Ashe won the French with Riessen, the australian with Roche and was a wimby runner-up with Ralston. But with Tanner?

[quote=BTURNER;7032096]http://tennis-buzz.com/1971-us-open-...s-the-it-girl/“She turned head because she was a pretty, young thing, but she captivated everyone because of her gutsy play and icy determination.
Chris Evert was not the first teen prodigy, but in an era filled with veterans like Billie Jean King and Margaret Court, along with one-handed backhands, serve and volley tactics, and uncertainty about the viability of the women’s tour, Evert revolutionized the women’s game.

On September 4, 1971, in her first Open at Forest Hills, this 16 years old perky blonde with a 12 tournaments, 44 match winning streak landed on the stadium court for her second round match against fourth seed Mary Ann Eisel.
Her wins had largely been against lesser lights or on clay, which favored her relentless baseline game. But on grass against one of the surface’s top players, she was unable to simply grind down her opponent. And so, Evert, an amateur who had taken 2 weeks off from high school in Fort Lauderdale for this tournament, seemed headed for home.

She lost a close first set 6-4 and trailed 6-5 in the second when Eisel stockpiled 3 match points. As television announcers Bud Collins and Jack Kramer gave her a warm ‘nice try kid’ sendoff, Evert suddenly showed Forest Hills and a national television audience that she had the makings of a champion.
On Eisel’s first effort, Evert set the tone, whistling a big backhand service return down the line. Then on a second serve, Evert mashed a crosscourt forehand passing shot. Evert easily captured the tiebreaker then crushed her demoralized foe 6-1 in the third set.

King who’d come over to watch the rookie, was impressed by how she handled the pressure, saying later:

A star was born in my eyes that match

"[/QUOTE

Before Martina became a factor and before Court retired we had a great quartet of ladies that may have been one of the all time best if not the ultimate best
Court, the mighty athlete
King, the schrewd and doggy tactician
Evert, the never missing machine
Goolagong, the fairy of tennis

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet

quite a list, kiki, thanks for posting it and making a case for doubles in this forum
i have no definite list, but i would vote for Gerulaitis/Sandy Mayer and Davidson/Newcombe. G/M won Wimbledon, D/N won the U.S.
don´t see Edmondson/Marks. Eddos GrandSlam success came in the 80´s and not with Marks
don´t see Ashe/Tanner either. Ashe won the French with Riessen, the australian with Roche and was a wimby runner-up with Ralston. But with Tanner?

I know what you mean and I tried not to duplicate a player in two different teams which is somewhat unfair
Ashe,Okker,Newcombe,Riessen,Fibak or Stewart were great with different mates
Vitas could have been a great doubles player but played little doubs once he became a top player and that is why I deliberately left him out
On clay only the Vilas-Borg team was excellent but since they became top rivals,they stopped what could have been a two star team much like Connors and Nastase, who won two majors even if none of them were really great doubs playwrs IMO

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet

Kiki?!
You are wasted, you should be writing for a top tennis magazine!!

Thanks Jay but 70 and 80 are the eras where I was more onto tennis and I have a good memory too
It is nothing special anyway
I really miss not being there in the 50's which were absolutely wonderful in tennis
I usually say that only Rock and pop music were even better than tennis in the 70 and still the 80
Ledzep were as creative and all round as Laver and Rush were as sophisticated as Nastase!!
Keep on posting and discuss a bit about these issues
Oh I worked a few times for a tennis magazine, just for fun in the first half of the 80

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet